Command and Control by Kenneth Mcdonagh

2026-02-03 15:37:04 UTC

This articles analysis identifies that the key gap is the little clarity over how the proposed developments of the EDPCIs could be developed as part of the C2, and what the actual aim of these developments is. There needs to be time spent defining the actual needs of EU defence, and there needs to be an attempt at avoiding the saturation of these different developments, for risk of them getting lost in the political atmosphere

2026-02-03 15:37:27 UTC

key gap: C2 structures

required to fill: serious discussion, subsequent implementation of agreed structures

exisitng structures: No, are not sufficient

2026-02-03 15:39:23 UTC

The capacity to organize, deploy, and run a military operation.

More efficient organisation and operation, like has been shown in the organisation of the common market and eurozone.

He argues EDIP allows the commission to show the effectiveness its shown in economic areas, but it still lacks clarity.

2026-02-03 15:39:57 UTC

- Heavy reliance on US C2 infrastructure and the lack of strategy and will to build a European one.

- As it sits outside the Commissions's competence or at least is interpreted that way, there is need for political will by the Member States. Maybe is time for Member States to stop being so jealous in defence?

- In general, the initiatives are concentrated in coordinating investment and voluntary capability development projects. There are a couple of PESCO projects but C2 structures and innovation are still thought within NATO interoperability.

2026-02-03 15:40:22 UTC

The gaps are in "political commitment, financial ambition and industrial coordination".

Political, institutional as well as technical measures are needed. However, Europe has not been able to assemble those in the past years. As an example is the SCAF. There is a need for political willingness.

Some initiatives partially address this issue for instance, CARD or the EDF, which have recognized a gap. In the past, cooperation has been made like with the Eurofighter Typhoon between four European states.

2026-02-03 15:41:06 UTC

The key gap identified is there is no definitive European C2 capability. A solution could be to develop indigenous C2 capabilities to manage EU defense capabilities. Not currently addresses the issue, MPCC too low scale. Potential for EU to develop architecture that mirrors NATO C2.

2026-02-03 15:41:55 UTC

Key gap - Command and Control (or C2) and dependency on the US

Required to fill the gap - More investment in EU military capacity to reduce reliance on external partners (US). Military planning and coordination required, and integration of technology projects that can inter-operate with NATO tech.

Do existing initiatives address gap - joint production and facilitating of joint procurement of weapons. Having the same quality of civilian infrastructure standard that could turn into military use.